Discussion Thread #61 ~ the appeal~

[Mr Fossil]

I didn't think it had been made available.

Anyway, not that it's that important but just because he said she wasn't breathing in later testimony doesn't mean he could have said additionally "she was everything" earlier.

The transcript is available here.

I agree, he could have said "she was everything" but given what he subsequently said I personally think it pretty unlikely.

 

[mrjitty]

As it wasn't the ambulance, nor security as they were already present, I would suggest it was to his wife, who then also turned up and, according to Stipp, made her classic comment about hoping it didn't get out to the papers.

Mr Fossil

I was hoping you would return!

I LOVE your WTA2 timeline

Fantastic work.

Are you also persuaded this whole sillyness arises out of the incorrect use of Johnson's notes as definitive timing for his call?

 

[Trotterly]

The transcript is available here.

I agree, he could have said "she was everything" but given what he subsequently said I personally think it pretty unlikely.

Thanks that's handy. I don't suppose you have Roux's Annexures as well?

 

[Deleted member 102539]

I guess this was another irrelevant point the Judge did not need to consider!

The great irony is that if Stipp hadn't turned up - then presumably there would have been a far larger delay until medical/police assistance was requested.

You don't know whether (dead) Reeva would still have been there in OP's home.

 

[mrjitty]

I asked about why you thought he put the ambulance lie in his affidavit. You're going back to his emotional state on the night of the killing? That wasn't what I asked you about. I just wanted to know why you thought he'd lie about something so important in his signed and sworn affidavit.

There is not a chance that every single word in that affidavit was not carefully considered.

I snorted with laughter when OP tried to pretend it was just some document his lawyers put together and he signed without thinking too much about it.

The oversight with going out on the balcony and the second fan were very damaging.

 

[Mr Fossil]

Mr Fossil

I was hoping you would return!

I LOVE your WTA2 timeline

Fantastic work.

Are you also persuaded this whole sillyness arises out of the incorrect use of Johnson's notes as definitive timing for his call?

Thank you. That is the basis of WTA2. Johnson isn't confident about the time himself as his exchange with Roux demonstrates:

Johnson: M’lady, can I ask the reference to the times, were they taken from my statement or were they taken from a central time server which I would assume the cell phone provider would have available?

Roux: Mr Johnson, I’m curious about it, because you explain to us, and we know your cell phone data, we know that’s the central data, we know you put it in your statement. You know you would not lie to the policeman and say it was 03:16 and the duration 58 seconds. You said to us that you checked it. That’s why I’m saying to you, and we received ... let me help you, we received from the police the time calls were made by the accused. The exact time calls.

Johnson: Thank you

Classic Roux, doing what he is paid to do I guess, and Johnson thanks him for what?

 

[Mr Fossil]

Re the jeans

The Jeans outside the window were confirmed to be Reeva's by Reeva mum after the trial in an interview

The inside-out jeans in the bedroom were never claimed by the prosecution to be Reevas

So a speculation is - they were actually worn by Pistorious

I think this is why the whole thing about the jeans on top of the duvet and the blue light under X

Nel's implication is that the duvet was already on the floor - known from the fan position/blood

Pistorius then threw the jeans on the duvet

This is why Nel went so hard on this point - only Pistorious can have put the jeans in that position

And they were inside out because he took them off in a huge hurry and didn't realise this fact would be important

Afterall - its just jeans lying on the floor

It was only later - when he had to construct his fan story - that the jeans became a big problem.

BIB Why do you say this? OP says they were Reeva's jeans (to Roux p114 and Nel p381) and Nel refers to them as her jeans (p440).

 

[Mr Fossil]

Thanks that's handy. I don't suppose you have Roux's Annexures as well?

No, I wish I did

 

[LemonMousse]

Thank you. That is the basis of WTA2. Johnson doesn't believe the time himself as his exchange with Roux demonstrates:



Classic Roux, doing what he is paid to do I guess, and Johnson thanks him for what?

Exactly. Thank you for posting that part of the transcript. People are assuming the time of Johnson's call is set in stone, but if even Johnson queried it then it can't be assumed to be correct.

The other difficulty is Stipp accidentally dialling the security landline while he was standing on OP's forecourt at 3.27. He has no clear memory of this, unsurprisingly.

He clearly remembers two calls - one that was engaged (or unanswered, can't quite recall) and the other at 3.15 when he actually spoke to security just after the final bangs.

Obviously the first call went unrecorded and this allowed Roux to manipulate the timeline so massively that his (Roux's) only explanation for the anomaly was that Dr Stipp was a liar trying to help the State.

I don't believe that Dr Stipp is a liar. He did speak to security at 3.15 and this was obviously after bangs because he reported them to Mr Baba.

If it was after the first bangs, then Dr Stipp managed to miss the second ones despite standing on his balcony, waiting for security, and looking straight into OP's window. On top of this, it would have to mean there were three sets of bangs - the first while they were in bed, the second while calling for help and the third while they were standing on the balcony (that they didn't hear).

Ludicrous. Of course that didn't happen.

If Pistorius is telling the truth, then Dr & Mrs Stipp must have dreamt the first bangs (both of them) and had hearing failure when it came to the last ones that everyone else (further away) heard.

The final bangs were at 3.15 obviously - and everyone heard them and everyone called security.

This PROVES that Pistorius is a lying murderer.

 

[Trotterly]

Exactly. Thank you for posting that part of the transcript. People are assuming the time of Johnson's call is set in stone, but if even Johnson queried it then it can't be assumed to be correct.

The other difficulty is Stipp accidentally dialling the security landline while he was standing on OP's forecourt at 3.27. He has no clear memory of this, unsurprisingly.

He clearly remembers two calls - one that was engaged (or unanswered, can't quite recall) and the other at 3.15 when he actually spoke to security just after the final bangs.

Obviously the first call went unrecorded and this allowed Roux to manipulate the timeline so massively that his (Roux's) only explanation for the anomaly was that Dr Stipp was a liar trying to help the State.

I don't believe that Dr Stipp is a liar. He did speak to security at 3.15 and this was obviously after bangs because he reported them to Mr Baba.

If it was after the first bangs, then Dr Stipp managed to miss the second ones despite standing on his balcony, waiting for security, and looking straight into OP's window. On top of this, it would have to mean there were three sets of bangs - the first while they were in bed, the second while calling for help and the third while they were standing on the balcony (that they didn't hear).

Ludicrous. Of course that didn't happen.

If Pistorius is telling the truth, then Dr & Mrs Stipp must have dreamt the first bangs (both of them) and had hearing failure when it came to the last ones that everyone else (further away) heard.

The final bangs were at 3.15 obviously - and everyone heard them and everyone called security.

This PROVES that Pistorius is a lying murderer.

Nel: "There are two sets of noises, we say the shots at 3.17 killed the deceased"

 

[mrjitty]

BIB Why do you say this? OP says they were Reeva's jeans (to Roux p114 and Nel p381) and Nel refers to them as her jeans (p440).

No evidence was led by the prosecution to establish it.

As you say, OP made this claim in EIC

Technically, Nel referring to them as her jeans is not evidence of such - he is actually repeating and casting doubt on OP's version

The only thing out of place, Mr Pistorius, is the pair of jeans. ---
That is correct, M'Lady.
Why would that be? Do you know? --- I do not, M'Lady.
You see, Mr Pistorius, everything else, undergarments, other clothes
are all in the overnight bag. The only thing outside of that overnight bag is her
jeans. You do not have an idea why? --- I do not, M'Lady.

I am not saying this is definitely the case - but it is interesting

I was always assuming Nel was only interested in why Reeva's jeans were not tidily packed away.

But a different implication is that they were not Reeva's jeans.

After all, Reeva's jeans were out the window.

 

[mrjitty]

Thank you. That is the basis of WTA2. Johnson isn't confident about the time himself as his exchange with Roux demonstrates:



Classic Roux, doing what he is paid to do I guess, and Johnson thanks him for what?

I read this again last week and it is a very clever trick.

He actually only says he has the accused's cell phone logs.

When read carefully - it is clear he knows Johnson's info only from the statement. At best this is only evidence of what Johnson believes the time was, not what it actually was.

I am increasingly sure there is no exhibit for this - as it is a central plank of roux's case.

So if the exhibit existed, Roux would surely have produced the exhibit into evidence at this point.

The other thing is, back when i learnt this stuff in the 90s - i would have expected Nel to have introduced this exhibit in EIC

Along the lines

J "Then I called security..."

N "Do you recall what time it was?"

J "I took a note of it - it was 3.17"

N "M'lady I would like to introduce exhibit Z which confirms the time was indeed 3.17...."

I don't know how RSA evidential procedure works exactly - but we saw Roux do exactly this with the security log

 

[Mr Fossil]

No evidence was led by the prosecution to establish it.

As you say, OP made this claim in EIC

Technically, Nel referring to them as her jeans is not evidence of such - he is actually repeating and casting doubt on OP's version



I am not saying this is definitely the case - but it is interesting

I was always assuming Nel was only interested in why Reeva's jeans were not tidily packed away.

But a different implication is that they were not Reeva's jeans.

After all, Reeva's jeans were out the window.

It's an interesting theory

 

[LemonMousse]

Nel: "There are two sets of noises, we say the shots at 3.17 killed the deceased"

Yes. But if you bothered to pay attention to the trial you'd know why he was using that time.

It was the time Mrs Stipp said she looked at her FAST CLOCK and heard the final bangs. Nel did not literally mean the bangs occurred at 3.17am. Why would he? Mrs Stipp was the only person anywhere in the trial who mentioned 3.17 and Nel knows that the clock was 2-4 minutes fast.

If it was 2/3 minutes fast this fits exactly with bangs just before Dr Stipp called security.

Think about this please. If the actual final bangs happened at 3.17, why were Dr & Mrs Stipp standing on their balcony completely oblivious to them? After he spoke to security, Dr Stipp went outside and waited for security. We know this because security spoke to him there.

It's not that hard to figure out.

 

[LemonMousse]

No evidence was led by the prosecution to establish it.

As you say, OP made this claim in EIC

Technically, Nel referring to them as her jeans is not evidence of such - he is actually repeating and casting doubt on OP's version



I am not saying this is definitely the case - but it is interesting

I was always assuming Nel was only interested in why Reeva's jeans were not tidily packed away.

But a different implication is that they were not Reeva's jeans.

After all, Reeva's jeans were out the window.

That is a very interesting idea. We've never actually considered that they may have been OP's jeans. I recall Reeva's mum saying they looked big to be Reeva's. And that's what I thought too.

Any (speculative) ideas about why Pistorius would leave his own jeans inside out and then deny they were his?

EXTRA: Just a thought.

I have always found it curious that Nel told OP that Reeva's jeans were inside out on the floor because she wanted to leave. As OP said, that made no sense...why would she take off her own clothes to leave?

Very unlike Nel to say something that illogical. Maybe he was edging towards something but change his mind at the last moment?

 

[mrjitty]

These transcripts are great to go back to. This is fantastic.

ven during cross-examination he was asked where his focus was and
he said that, inter alia, his focus was on the fan in front of the door. You
cannot deny that.

--- I cannot deny that, M'Lady. I do not know what Mr Van
Rensburg, Colonel Van Rensburg’s focus was.

There was. it went further. M'Lady, may I just request photograph
album. The photograph was shown by Mr Roux. M'Lady, it is page 870 of the
record. You do not have to page through that. If you do not mind, you are
welcome to, but I do not think it is in the album, Mr Pistorius. M'Lady, it may
take just a minute. M'Lady, I will carry on with something until we find it. Mr
Pistorius, I have to put to you that at page 829 of the record, and I will send a
record across to you, at the… from about line 22:
“The main bedroom, the main focus as we stop there
because we did not know where we are going to find next,
so we first stopped in the main bedroom. Now when I
entered there, I observed what is happening in the main
bedroom, what we saw in the main bedroom…”
And then it carries on at the bottom of 830, from line 20:
“What did you see about the fan? The fan, the fan I am
talking about, the metalic one, the stainless steel one, if I
can say it like that, the stainless steel, it was standing in
front of the door and then the curtains was open.

So basically the unchallenged evidence of Colonel Van Rensburg is that he went upstairs, noted the fan position and the open curtains.

Photos were taken to confirm this.

LOL

 

[mrjitty]

Thank you. That is the basis of WTA2. Johnson isn't confident about the time himself as his exchange with Roux demonstrates:

There is a different possibility

For instance Masipa is happy to adjust Stipp's sequencing so that the cricket bats come AFTER his call to security. She effectively does the same with Mike N & Mrs N even though neither hears any bangs after 3.16

Can it simply be that Johnson is the one who had the sequence wrong?

So in other words the shots came before his call at 3.16?

Afterall - he wrote this all down later - whereas Dr Stipp was a witness at the crime scene.

 

[Mr Fossil]

There is a different possibility

For instance Masipa is happy to adjust Stipp's sequencing so that the cricket bats come AFTER his call to security. She effectively does the same with Mike N & Mrs N even though neither hears any bangs after 3.16

Can it simply be that Johnson is the one who had the sequence wrong?

So in other words the shots came before his call at 3.16?

Afterall - he wrote this all down later - whereas Dr Stipp was a witness at the crime scene.

I too think he may have the sequence wrong. Check out my comment in cell E17 of WTA2 and let me know what you think.

 

[mrjitty]

That is a very interesting idea. We've never actually considered that they may have been OP's jeans. I recall Reeva's mum saying they looked big to be Reeva's. And that's what I thought too.

Any (speculative) ideas about why Pistorius would leave his own jeans inside out and then deny they were his?

EXTRA: Just a thought.

I have always found it curious that Nel told OP that Reeva's jeans were inside out on the floor because she wanted to leave. As OP said, that made no sense...why would she take off her own clothes to leave?

Very unlike Nel to say something that illogical. Maybe he was edging towards something but change his mind at the last moment?

I think if they are his jeans, it directly opens the implication he was dressed. Because they were on the floor over the duvet.

Something that is very interesting with X, is to go behind the narrative and examine the agenda of the prosecutor and accused

The jeans are particularly sensitive to OP. He invents an absurd story in relation to them

But why is this? After all, they are just a pair of jeans that Reeva could have been taken off in the early evening

In some respects the sensitivity of the point is more important than how they got there.

 

[Interested Bystander]

The transcript is available here.

I agree, he could have said "she was everything" but given what he subsequently said I personally think it pretty unlikely.

Many, many thanks for the link. I have spent the last four days listening again to the case to try to find the odd point that was being queried. It has been a nightmare!